Playing the "comp game" and how to lose it.

I think I shot myself in the foot playing the "comp game" with the Total Rewards program. I'm not sorry I did it because I got what I wanted... and I may have gotten what I deserved.

Over the past couple of years I decided to take advantage of all of the free play and shopping sprees and offers I could get without overspending on my entertainment (gaming) budget. It worked for a while. But the system caught up with me.

For much of 2011 and early 2012 I was a very frequent visitor to Caesars Palace but my play for each trip was limited to a certain fixed amount. Over the course of a year it totaled up to be high enough to have four times the points needed for 7Stars. But in mid-2012 the value of my offers was cut by about 70-percent. During that same time, a friend of mine who had about the same number of tier points (which is based on annual play) but who visited Caesars only a few times during the year did not suffer a cut in his "offer value" and in some cases it was even increased. Why would my offers be reduced and his offers be increased when we had the same number of tier points?

Well, the explanation I got was that while my level of tier points came from many different visits, his similar level of tier points came from fewer visits making him more valuable since he played more per visit.

This year the same thing appears to have happened with me at Harrah's Rincon, another Total Rewards property. I was diligent in taking advantage of the many daily and weekly free play offers, and while my tier score this year is already above 691,000 I have seen the value of my offers at Rincon cut by more than half during the course of the year. Again I believe that while my total play is high (691,000 tier points is more than four times the required amount for 7 Stars), the value of my play per visit is low plus I've taken advantage of "too many" free play offers.

There is another reason why my "offer value" has dropped and that is how my value has changed as a player. In years past I played games with a higher house edge including 9-5 Double Double Bonus video poker with an expected return of about 98% but now I play 8-5 Aces and Faces video poker with an expected return of about 99.2%. The difference is that I play longer and score more "tier points" with the same budget.

The big point is that you can "milk" these comp systems for only so long before they catch up with you. That's the game. Cows don't give good milk forever.

Cue Rob's scolding and backlash...

Alan, I mentioned before that my casino also uses a per visit average to determine free play, etc. That is one reason why I limited myself to one long visit per week. The humorous side effect of this is I have continued to receive free play since I stopped playing in early May. I still am getting my maximum free play. I suspect if you changed your approach you would eventually see your freeplay increase. At my casino it is based on your most recent 13 trips.

One of the tricks I've used when only collecting freeplay is to switch to my wife's card after downloading the freeplay. It appears this confuses the system and I get no play on the days I only collect freeplay. YMMV.

Well the good news is at least you were able to get more free items and fun than your friend. You had those extra visits which you reported about where you got free food and play.

Now as you said the Harrah's offers are low to the point where you no longer feel it's worth it to go and you can do big Caesar's trips like your friend and get the same high trip offers since you will be spending 4 to 5 Harrah's trips worth of money. Add to all this you still get your Seven Stars benefits.

Hope it all works out for you Alan and you have an enjoyable trip and the generous offers start to flow back in.

I was back at Rincon on the first - the only day that it was "economically worthwhile" for me to go there based on my free play offers. And I had quite a night hitting quad aces for $2,000 plus a nice run of quads and left with a healthy profit and scored... ready for this.... 11,700 tier points in one night. I really don't know if that will be good or bad for the next time my offers and play are reviewed. I had a lot of play over six hours.

By the way, I have one "bad hold" to report. Playing Aces and Faces I was dealt Kd Qd As and two small cards. I held the suited KQ as I should and on the draw came three aces. Damn.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by arcimede$

One of the tricks I've used when only collecting freeplay is to switch to my wife's card after downloading the freeplay. It appears this confuses the system and I get no play on the days I only collect freeplay.

---

At Rincon I was told that there are no "points" awarded when you play the "free play." So what I've been told to do by other players is after downloading the free play I should withdraw my card from the machine. The free play credits will remain on the machine. Then I should insert my card again. And then when I play the free play, the points are supposed to accumulate. Any info on this??

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Alan Mendelson

By the way, I have one "bad hold" to report. Playing Aces and Faces I was dealt Kd Qd As and two small cards. I held the suited KQ as I should and on the draw came three aces. Damn.

---

Alan: If others are correct that the draw cards are continuously shuffled until the DRAW button is pressed it wouldn't matter at all what you see because it would have been extremely unlikely those three aces would have shown up if you had just held the ace. You would have pressed the button at a vastly different moment.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Count Room

Alan: If others are correct that the draw cards are continuously shuffled until the DRAW button is pressed it wouldn't matter at all what you see because it would have been extremely unlikely those three aces would have shown up if you had just held the ace. You would have pressed the button at a vastly different moment.

---

I agree with you. But you hate to see this.

One thing I would caution against is treating Caesars/Harrahs as synonymous with all gaming companies or gaming in general. We don't know what the face of gaming will be like in a decade. The idea that the money-hemorrhaging mess that is Caesars/Harrahs will continue to be some kind of blueprint for all casino companies may or may not be true. With any luck, they'll finally be allowed to fail.

It's clear they made a corporate decision to reward those people who play more per visit with the predictive models saying those folks can be massaged into more big trips, as opposed to those playing less per visit, who it's felt won't be making more and more excursions. Evidently number of visits is considered to have more concrete limitations than loss-per-visit. That's a fascinating conclusion by Caesars/Harrahs. They want you to lose control in each visit, not necessarily grace their presence with multiple visits.

When you think about it, it's an obvious and cynical model. Each trip requires outlays by the visitor for gasoline or airfares -- Harrah's doesn't really get a piece of those. So to extract a larger percentage of your budget, they prefer visitors take fewer trips while blowing more money gaming as opposed to traveling.

I wanted to add -- you realize why Rob gets mega-comps for his amount of play now, right? He fits the model -- short bursts of wild, denomination-jumping play with very short visits. The computers must love him! He probably projects as a real cash cow, so he'd get the royal treatment with minimal play.

redietz I agree. The philosophy at Caesars seems to be: We prefer a player who will take one room for one night and play two thousand dollars, than a player who will take one room for two nights and play two thousand dollars. Or:

Preferred Player A One night, $2,000 play
Less preferred player B Two nights, $2,000 play

But from a business standpoint that makes sense for them: they only have to give up "one room night" for the same amount of play.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by redietz

I wanted to add -- you realize why Rob gets mega-comps for his amount of play now, right? He fits the model -- short bursts of wild, denomination-jumping play with very short visits. The computers must love him! He probably projects as a real cash cow, so he'd get the royal treatment with minimal play.

---

This is possible that he gets big comps because he is viewed as a high roller. But it is also possible that his comps are restricted if he is really winning as much as he is winning. And most comp systems are based on coin in. If his wins are coming with minimal play he has very little "coin in" and doesn't get comps.

I want to tell a story that I told before, about a craps player at Caesars who had a $25,000 budget for the weekend. He got to the hotel and on his first day there he ran into terrible luck at the craps table and lost his entire $25K in just a few hours. At the end of his trip he was told he would not be comped because he didn't play the "required four hours per day, each day." It didn't matter that he dropped $25K in a couple of hours.

Well, he did "appeal" and eventually was comped for the weekend as usual, but it just goes to show you how whacky their comp systems are. By the way, this was before Total Rewards and back in the old days of RFB.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Alan Mendelson

This is possible that he gets big comps because he is viewed as a high roller. But it is also possible that his comps are restricted if he is really winning as much as he is winning. And most comp systems are based on coin in. If his wins are coming with minimal play he has very little "coin in" and doesn't get comps.

I want to tell a story that I told before, about a craps player at Caesars who had a $25,000 budget for the weekend. He got to the hotel and on his first day there he ran into terrible luck at the craps table and lost his entire $25K in just a few hours. At the end of his trip he was told he would not be comped because he didn't play the "required four hours per day, each day." It didn't matter that he dropped $25K in a couple of hours.

Well, he did "appeal" and eventually was comped for the weekend as usual, but it just goes to show you how whacky their comp systems are. By the way, this was before Total Rewards and back in the old days of RFB.

---

I thought Rob didn't get comps or accept them?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by a2a3dseddie

I thought Rob didn't get comps or accept them?

---

As a professional or as a casual player? He seems to have different rules and conditions.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Alan Mendelson

As a professional or as a casual player? He seems to have different rules and conditions.

---

I just want to press the DEAL/DRAW button at the best nanosecond possible, professionally OR casually. I'll even forego all my future casino comps and grocery deductions for this valuable timing skill.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Count Room

I just want to press the DEAL/DRAW button at the best nanosecond possible, professionally OR casually. I'll even forego all my future casino comps and grocery deductions for this valuable timing skill.

---

Wouldn't we all!!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Alan Mendelson

As a professional or as a casual player? He seems to have different rules and conditions.

---

Not surprising that you have not yet absorbed this. I talked to a Verizon rep today who never did get the question after 40 minutes. Of course, he too was an Obama voter. His jive voice gave him away.

I've always used and always still do use a slot card, with the sole exception being from sometime in 2005 thru early 2009 ONLY WHEN PLAYING SPS, because of being barred from playing after winning too often at Harrahs on the Strip & Bellagio. I did play more of my other strategies during that time--always using my cards.

I have recently been restricted from slot club points at machines at the Eldorado, and Casino Fandango will no longer let me play vp above dollars. Unimportant, as we are leaving the area for warmer temps in NM, Texas & Az. next week.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Rob.Singer

Not surprising that you have not yet absorbed this.

---

Sometimes it's hard to keep track of what you say. So much of what you say is lost among the garbage in your posts.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Alan Mendelson

At Rincon I was told that there are no "points" awarded when you play the "free play." So what I've been told to do by other players is after downloading the free play I should withdraw my card from the machine. The free play credits will remain on the machine. Then I should insert my card again. And then when I play the free play, the points are supposed to accumulate. Any info on this??

---

Points are not credited at my casino either, this means you don't know when you've played through the freeplay unless you count hands, cash out regularly or wait until one point shows up. By switching to my wife's card I could just let the point show up. In addition, a friend indicated that even after pulling his card the point would show up on his account giving him a short session. It must keep track of the last card in the machine.

As for trying to accumulate points, this does not happen at my casino after inserting my wife's card until the freeplay goes through once. So, I'm pretty sure it wouldn't work by reinserting my own card.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Alan Mendelson

Sometimes it's hard to keep track of what you say. So much of what you say is lost among the garbage in your posts.

---

Readers remember what they read only when they want to remember it. Garbage is only in the mind of the beholder, esp. when that "garbage" hits too close to home.

So entertaining reading about players sitting on the edge of their seats over whether or not they're getting POINTS when playing freeplay :) Worry about whether or not you're losing MONEY for God's sake, and stop embarrassing yourselves. And I told you arci could never and would never stay away from the casinos once those old machines were ditched. ANYTHING to get out of the house.

As usual Singer is wrong. I go to the casino once every 2 weeks and collect my freeplay for those two weeks only. I play anywhere from 60-75 hands depending on the amount of freeplay. On my last visit I hit a SF and came home ahead $540. Last month I hit quad aces on one trip and came home with $1390. For around 2.5 hours of my time, much of it waiting for my 2nd freeplay to be downloaded, it's worth the trip. The worst I've done is $140. However, it won't last forever. I expect next month to be cut significantly and that will be that.

Congrats to Arci for sticking to the strategy of playing only with an edge.

Someone on another board recently posted about the late, lamented Westward Ho next to the Stardust. I remember it well -- good place to take a break from the Stardust sports book. But my point is that the Ho had a double bank of 9/6 JoB progressives at its entrance, which were routinely positive. Despite this, I always felt a bit guilty about playing a few hands there, because OTHER OPPORTUNITIES AROUND TOWN WERE BETTER. It seemed a misuse of my money to play something that had only a small edge, despite the free ice cream socials in the lounge.

How times have changed. Now those machines would be considered among the best in Las Vegas. It's important to keep the deteriorating conditions in mind, and also important to pull the plug on playing when you don't have an edge.

I'm not qualified to diagnose NPD in Rob but his posts are getting so incoherent I suspect a touch of alcoholic dementia.

And there you have it again. Life has turned so bad for arci that he continues the need to make up stories of winning (of course, after playing when he said he would stop....and THAT IS THAT!:)) So where's the pictures of these phantom wins? How easy we forget! Remember the last time I had to humiliate you into finally submitting SOME kind of picture??

As I said in my column, he truly is the gift that keeps on giving. Keep up the good work my friend, and when my wife & I stop by next summer for a visit, we'll keep mum when the KFC gets served :)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Alan Mendelson

redietz I agree. The philosophy at Caesars seems to be: We prefer a player who will take one room for one night and play two thousand dollars, than a player who will take one room for two nights and play two thousand dollars. Or:

Preferred Player A One night, $2,000 play
Less preferred player B Two nights, $2,000 play

But from a business standpoint that makes sense for them: they only have to give up "one room night" for the same amount of play.

---

Actually, that's not what's going on here.

First off, Caesar's is finally tightening its belt on the comps in general. That's not to say that everyone's comps have gone down, but they are attempting to punish those they believe to be "comp grinders" -- players who typically stick to low-house-edge games and exploit every comp possible. They are starting to realize that they are not making much from these players.

I am a bit surprised that Alan is seeing these reductions, given his 691,000 tier credits. Most comp grinders pretty much quit when they hit the Seven Stars minimum (150,000). Still, they are clearly unhappy with Alan's relatively low (by Seven Stars standards) coin-in-per-trip, as well as his game selection. When I say "they", I am referring to their automated system, NOT any human being.

Anyway, why is Alan's friend, who bets about the same in a year as Alan, getting better comps just because the friend gambles in more "concentrated" fashion?

Alan theorizes that they don't like giving away free hotel rooms for "slower" gamblers.

That's not really it.

Casinos are hoping to bring out the degenerate gambler in you.

They are happy to take your money if you visit regularly, set a reasonable stop-loss, and never exceed that.

However, they're MUCH happier to have you if you "go off" for more on several trips.

This is because you have established a potential for monster losses. If the computer sees that you never seem to lose more than $2500 in a trip, it doesn't want to give you lucrative offers to visit, as the best-case scenario against you isn't that good.

If it sees you sometimes losing $10k, $20k, or more on certain trips, that's more encouraging. It would much rather you come once every eight weeks and average $100,000 coin-in than every two weeks averaging $25,000 coin in.

Now, there's a flip side to this.

Casinos DO prefer a steady player to one who plays for awhile and then visits without gambling. So if you play a lot, then visit 6 times without gambling at all (or very little), it is going to take a lot of play again to "restore" where you once were comp-wise. Hosts get particularly frustrated when you take trips they arrange and don't gamble at all.

Casinos are also careful about overcomping players who might have busted their entire bankroll.

A player who shot off his $100,000 inheritance in one weekend is worthless to them in the future, if this person otherwise has no way of making any kind of decent money. Even if the guy WANTS to come back and gamble big, he is tapped out for life. For this reason, casinos are skittish about offering big future comps based upon one big weekend. They want to see a pattern showing that you will keep returning.

Simply put, comps are really issued for future expectation, not as a reward for your past play. Many gamblers don't understand this.

The Total Rewards system contradicts that a bit, as you can "bank" your RCs and spend them whenever you feel like, provided you earn at least 1 RC every 6 months. This is why hosts are forbidden to comp you anything until your RCs are used up. They don't want people using their hosts for comps, and then banking the RCs until the day they eventually stop gambling, and redeeming them at that point. The casino's attitude is, "We're going to do all we can to make you a slave to gambling every trip."

BTW, Alan, you are not playing the comp game well if you have 691,000 tiers.

The Total Rewards program is definitely one of diminishing returns once you reach Seven Stars at 150,000.

Sure, there are additional benefits after that, but they aren't nearly worth the money you'll be losing to get there.

And yes, your freeplay and other offers will be better than the 150k tier Seven Stars members, but again not enough to justify it. As you've seen, you're getting severely undercomped now.

If you really want to "play the comp game", you should do the absolute minimum to get to Seven Stars, only play the highest expectation games, and redeem every comp/freeplay that is worth your time to do.

I think you posted before that you actually didn't redeem your annual dinner last year (correct me if I'm wrong), which is pretty crazy. That's just leaving money on the table.

I haven't used my Annual Dinner ($500) yet, but I will. And I have already booked both my Seven Stars cruise and annual trip. And I used my Diamond Dinner ($100) already. And I've milked nearly every worthwhile offer I've gotten in the Vegas area. Oh... and I stayed at the Rio for 23 nights in June while playing the World Series of Poker.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Rob.Singer

As I said in my column, he truly is the gift that keeps on giving. Keep up the good work my friend, and when my wife & I stop by next summer for a visit, we'll keep mum when the KFC gets served :)

---

The more I think about it... if you use your column as a personal attack against a private individual (Arc) I think it's about as low as you and your publication can go. It's one thing to criticize a published author such as Dancer, but Arc?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Dan Druff

BTW, Alan, you are not playing the comp game well if you have 691,000 tiers.

The Total Rewards program is definitely one of diminishing returns once you reach Seven Stars at 150,000.

---

I never played for points. The points come as a result of my play. And 8/5 Aces and Faces with a 99.2% payback is about as good as it gets at Rincon and at Caesars it's 8/5 Bonus.

I've noticed what appear to be some aberrations in the Harrah's systems. When I visit Cherokee (a topic of a recent Dancer column), I appear to have gotten much more of an offer boost than if I were to play a comparable amount in Las Vegas. Maybe it's assumed that anyone venturing over hill and dale to get to the North Carolina tribal lands is truly an addict and worth roping in elsewhere, or maybe it's just weird accounting. Any thoughts?

P.S. Very bummed I didn't make time to eat at Paula Dean's last time. It's now closed, of course. The butter would kill you, but I liked it. No better breakfast to be had.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by redietz

I've noticed what appear to be some aberrations in the Harrah's systems. When I visit Cherokee (a topic of a recent Dancer column), I appear to have gotten much more of an offer boost than if I were to play a comparable amount in Las Vegas.

---

It's the same with Rincon vs Vegas. Play $5,000 at Rincon and they'll take notice and you will immediately get bounce back money and free play offers. Play $5,000 in Vegas and no one will notice who you are.

can anyone provide more info on the diamond celebration dinner? i made level 2 diamond in august and going again in December for gift shopping event and $850 free play and read somewhere that we get a $100 Diamond Celebration Dinner. Do I have to ask for it to get it? Any info on this Comp would be great! Really looking forward to December as the last trip was fun as I came home a Winner for a change!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Alan Mendelson

The more I think about it... if you use your column as a personal attack against a private individual (Arc) I think it's about as low as you and your publication can go. It's one thing to criticize a published author such as Dancer, but Arc?

---

You know the answer to that. Arci is TONS more fun to jab at! He's an admitted math geek, and in high school, college, and even in Corporate America, those of us who mainly choose to use common sense over strict math have always had an ENORMOUS amount of fun poking at these dull bores because they all eventually get chipped away at enough to break. He's a gamer at it, but I've always been very patient. As a result, it's paid off in spades over the years. So why stop the fun now!?

Besides, all will be well when we visit him next summer....even if it's only the 3 of us.

If you made Diamond or "renewed" Diamond in 2013 (that is, earned enough 2013 tier credits to guarantee Diamond in 2014), then you are eligible for the Diamond dinner.

It is only $100. There are a limited number of restaurants participating, but the good news is that most at Caesar's Palace DO accept it.

It's very simple. Just go to Total Rewards, ask for the list of restaurants for the Diamond celebration dinner, and then have them print out a $100 certificate when you're ready to use it. Only caveat is that you have to use the certificate within 7 days of having it printed, so don't get it printed if you're not ready to use it soon.

I believe you have until the end of 2013 to do this, but you also might have until March 31. I'd do it in 2013 to be safe.

I used mine at Nobu at Caesar's. It was a great meal. (The $100 didn't nearly cover the meal, though!)

Oh, and the $100 is tax-free, so you should truly order a minimum of $100 before-tax food if you want to get the full bang for the buck out of it.

Here's a serious question for those of you that are locked in in a big way to the TR program: When I was playing large at Harrahs Inc., I always stopped playing at their properties as soon as I reached Diamond level. I won 10 out of the 11 years I did that, but the only years it might be considered somewhat significant was when I beat them out of a little over $70,000. That year I hit four Aces w/ the kicker on a Caesars $25 DDBP machine. Readers of GT may remember this because I told of how I zoomed up from Laughlin for a night on River Run weekend in late April, and as soon as I won I got on my Harley and drove home to Phx. In fact, the hacks at videopoker.com were so jealous and hateful that I won that they spent days mocking it, me, and my wife, because she was with me on the way there but she had to fly home..Thus, one of the reasons for writing my "VP.com Hater Eats Dirt" article after one of the sick leaders of the Singer-hating clique over there died an untimely but well-deserved death. And it warms my heart to this day.

Anyway, while I can't today compare the program freebies to when I was in, I was always amazed at the quantity of freebies, giveaways, flights, comps etc. they bestowed on me. My question: although I never counted any of the slot club fluff in whether I won or lost overall, does anyone here actually ever win by the end of the year even if you do count stuff other than results directly from the machines? And, have all those free things been cut into yet?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Rob.Singer

Here's a serious question for those of you that are locked in in a big way to the TR program: When I was playing large at Harrahs Inc., I always stopped playing at their properties as soon as I reached Diamond level. I won 10 out of the 11 years I did that, but the only years it might be considered somewhat significant was when I beat them out of a little over $70,000. That year I hit four Aces w/ the kicker on a Caesars $25 DDBP machine. Readers of GT may remember this because I told of how I zoomed up from Laughlin for a night on River Run weekend in late April, and as soon as I won I got on my Harley and drove home to Phx. In fact, the hacks at videopoker.com were so jealous and hateful that I won that they spent days mocking it, me, and my wife, because she was with me on the way there but she had to fly home..Thus, one of the reasons for writing my "VP.com Hater Eats Dirt" article after one of the sick leaders of the Singer-hating clique over there died an untimely but well-deserved death. And it warms my heart to this day.

Anyway, while I can't today compare the program freebies to when I was in, I was always amazed at the quantity of freebies, giveaways, flights, comps etc. they bestowed on me. My question: although I never counted any of the slot club fluff in whether I won or lost overall, does anyone here actually ever win by the end of the year even if you do count stuff other than results directly from the machines? And, have all those free things been cut into yet?

---

Try actually reading some of my messages instead of spending all of your time here terribling up every thread, and you will have these answers.

I've posted about this several times.

thanks Dan for that great info. This Forum is a good source of information Alan! $100 isn't as much as it used to be but if I hadn't read about it here, I may have missed out on it.

Nobu sounds good! I would also like to try a Gordon Ramsay Restaurant that's popping up everywhere. I wonder if those Restaurants are a Caesars or independent?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by russkg

can anyone provide more info on the diamond celebration dinner? i made level 2 diamond in august and going again in December for gift shopping event and $850 free play and read somewhere that we get a $100 Diamond Celebration Dinner. Do I have to ask for it to get it? Any info on this Comp would be great! Really looking forward to December as the last trip was fun as I came home a Winner for a change!

---

Go to your Total Rewards desk... at any TR casino... and they give you a $100 certificate.

Also, alcohol is not covered.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by russkg

I wonder if those Restaurants are a Caesars or independent?

---

I had dinner with the head of Caesars restaurants back in April along with another VP of Casesars. With the exception of Central, the 24 hour restaurant off the lobby at Caesars Palace, EVERY restaurant at Caesars Palace is owned and operated by Caesars under license from the various chefs whose names are on the door of the restaurant.

To answer Rob -- I don't play enough at Caesars/Harrah's for it to matter. I get a couple of comped rooms a year, but only during slow times. I've lost money playing vp the last two years, but am still ahead lifetime. Since I've only played 40-50 hours a year, the room offers and such come close to balancing the losses the last two years, but I would not count them or meals as offsetting losses. I think that's silly. I certainly wouldn't count movie passes or junk won via Palms drawings as offsetting losses, for example. Back in my youth, I never counted meals won or free trips via drawings as "winnings." I "won" a cruise for two and a trip to a Chargers game, but I think it's rationalizing to count these things as "winnings."

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by redietz

To answer Rob -- I don't play enough at Caesars/Harrah's for it to matter. I get a couple of comped rooms a year, but only during slow times. I've lost money playing vp the last two years, but am still ahead lifetime. Since I've only played 40-50 hours a year, the room offers and such come close to balancing the losses the last two years, but I would not count them or meals as offsetting losses. I think that's silly. I certainly wouldn't count movie passes or junk won via Palms drawings as offsetting losses, for example. Back in my youth, I never counted meals won or free trips via drawings as "winnings." I "won" a cruise for two and a trip to a Chargers game, but I think it's rationalizing to count these things as "winnings."

---

You can only count comps as "winnings" if you use their value TO YOU.

Retail value does not matter if you were not going to otherwise pay for it.

So when you get a free cruise, you have to ask yourself, "Would I have paid for this cruise had I not gotten it as a comp?" And if the answer is YES, then you have to answer "How much?" The answer to "How much would you have paid" is exactly what you can claim it was worth.

Same thing goes for hotel rooms, meals, etc.

The only comps you can fully count as money is freeplay, and even there you need to subtract expected losses from it. So if you have $500 in freeplay but are playing a 99% return machine, your actual value is $495. Whether you win or lose is immaterial to counting comp value. I'm not saying winning isn't important (it's the MOST important), but when counting comps, you need to figure the value BEFORE you play the freeplay, not after.

The only exception to devaluing freeplay is if you were definitely going to play anyway. So if you're on a trip and were certain you were going to play at least as much as the value of your freeplay (even if you had no freeplay), and if the freeplay works on the machines you want, then you can count it at full value. Why? Because the freeplay takes the place of actual real money you would have inserted in the machine.

There is actually some discussion among Seven Stars members that Caesar's should make the program more flexible, and allow freeplay in lieu of benefits not taken.

For example, many people don't like traveling (or are unable to do so), so the Seven Stars Annual Trip goes to waste. Others don't have a desire to go to the destinations where Caesar's properties are located. Again, it goes to waste. It's annoying to let this benefit go to waste, as you get $500 in food credits and up to $1200 worth of airfare. (The free hotel nights don't matter because you get them anyway.) Indeed, these are real costs to Caesar's. They have to pay almost full value to the airline, and the food, while much cheaper than $500 for them, still costs real money. This is different than giving free hotel rooms or seats at a concert, where it can be rationalized that they are simply filling unsold inventory at virtually zero real cost.

Some people have suggested that they let you take some form of freeplay, even if reduced, in lieu of the trip. So it could be something like "You get $500 food and up to $1200 in airfare, or you can take $800 in freeplay at your home casino."

Same goes for the annual meal. I haven't used mine yet because most of my visits to Vegas restaurants involve me, my girlfriend, and my young son. Even at an expensive place like Nobu, we can't spend $500 unless we order some really expensive wine. Last year I waited until December 31 when my parents were in town, and I brought them to the dinner, in order to spend all the money. However, this year I just haven't had the chance to do something like that. None of my friends or family ever seem to be in Vegas when I can go to one of these dinners. If I can't make this happen, I'll have to just do the Nobu thing and try to spend as much as possible.

Again, it has been suggested that they allow you to take some form of reduced freeplay in lieu of the $500 meal. Or turn the $500 meal into $250, and give some freeplay along with it.

I understand why they don't allow you to exchange anything for the annual cruise, because Norwegian is giving that to Caesar's for free as part of a partnership agreement. Basically Norwegian is willing to give up one balcony stateroom in exchange for getting a high stakes gambler on board. They only allow one of these because it allows Norwegian to "try out" a Seven Stars member, and only invite him back for free if he gambles. If he doesn't, then he only gets to come back free once per year as part of their marketing agreement with Caesar's (unless he grabs one of those certificates they hand out like candy, but then he only gets an inside cabin with blackout dates.)

Also, the "Signature Events" should again be able to be exchanged for some form of freeplay. None of them really appealed to me this year. I ended up going to the shopping one, and going to the overpriced Tommy Bahama. My girlfriend isn't really a high-end-designer-brand shopper, so she didn't want it. She used my last one to buy an expensive purse, but she doesn't need a second one.

Anyway, I think Caesar's would have a lot more happy customers if they provided more flexibility.

I was going to give up on the cruise for the second year in a row, due to the lack of airfare coverage by Caesar's. The cruises from California basically suck and aren't worth my time. I found a way to "double dip" by making my cruise from the same place as my annual trip -- New Orleans, so I'm doing it. One other nice thing about New Orleans is that they put $500 in RCs in your account instead of a $500 dining credit, so you can just bank the RCs and eat at one of the many interesting restaurants around the city.

I do have to say that the Great Gift Wrapup is a genius marketing ploy by Caesar's.

That is a good example of flexibility.

They place it right around the holidays, where people can use their Great Gift Wrap Up points (separate from RCs) to do "free" holiday shopping.

This satisfies both players who like to see something tangible as a result of all their play (i.e. losses) during the year, as well as the ones who simply want maximum value. They allow you to use the points to either purchase gifts or more practical redemptions such as freeplay or gas cards.

Last year I squeezed maximum value out of it by buying a gas card, an iPad (which actually was priced very fairly to where I wasn't losing value), and then using the rest for freeplay. I gave the iPad to my girlfriend, which was then taken over by my son. I want to get another this year, so I hope they're offering it.

I appreciate the detailed input, from redietz to DD. My one comment would be that giving freeplay a value based on machine ER before even playing is as loose as it gets. Phantom bucks at its finest. Only actual cashout should be used.

I don't disagree with that.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Rob.Singer

I appreciate the detailed input, from redietz to DD. My one comment would be that giving freeplay a value based on machine ER before even playing is as loose as it gets. Phantom bucks at its finest. Only actual cashout should be used.

---

On the surface, it would appear foolish to value freeplay based upon its original amount, rather than what you cashout.

But look at it this way:

Rob, let's say we were in a casino together, and we walked by a $5-per-credit video poker machine. And I say, "Rob, I love your posts on Alan's forum so much, they have provided me months of free entertainment. You know what? Here is $25 on me to play a hand on this machine. You don't have to give me any of your winnings. It's my gift to you!"

Then you play the hand and hit a Royal for $20,000.

How much money did I give you?

If I went around bragging, "I gave Rob Singer $20,000", I'm sure you would take exception to that. You would likely point out that I gave you $25 and you turned that into $20,000 on your own, and you'd be correct.

So the truth is that I gave you $25, and luck gave you $19,975.

Freeplay is the same way. If you want to convert it to actual value, it HAS to be done this way:

- If you weren't going to otherwise play, the freeplay value is the amount of freeplay times the expected return on the machine. So $100 freeplay on a 99% Video Poker machine has a $99 value.

- If you were going to play regardless of whether or not you had the freeplay, the value is the amount of the freeplay. This is because a $100 freeplay would actually be fully substituting for a $100 bill that you would have otherwise inserted.

Rob, if you had $100 in freeplay and hit a Royal, would you tell everyone that the casino gave you $20,000 in comps? Obviously not. So you can't count freeplay value from results. Results are based upon luck. Luck does not figure into expected value.

I value free play this way:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Dan Druff

- If you were going to play regardless of whether or not you had the freeplay, the value is the amount of the freeplay. This is because a $100 freeplay would actually be fully substituting for a $100 bill that you would have otherwise inserted.

---

I can't value free play on "expected return" or anything like it because I expect zero when I put money in a video poker machine.

The paytable does not represented expected return. The paytable represents what different hands pay if you hit them. Of course the APs will disagree with me.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Alan Mendelson

I value free play this way:



I can't value free play on "expected return" or anything like it because I expect zero when I put money in a video poker machine.

The paytable does not represented expected return. The paytable represents what different hands pay if you hit them. Of course the APs will disagree with me.

---

Exactly....on all counts. That's why I always play free play thru once and cash out. I expect nothing and it is worth nothing going in, so anything that comes is an unexpected bonus. Nobody ever bought anything with phantom bucks, and valuing $1000 in free play as 990 bucks before playing--and not attaining it--is the #1 reason players will not stop when they said they would, and end up losing whatever they did win back.

AP's will disagree with and call anyone wrong if they do not agree with them.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Rob.Singer

I always play free play thru once and cash out.

---

gosh... if I had done that the other night I would have shorted myself about $7,000. Which is why you should try having a "rising stop loss" with your wins, Rob.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Alan Mendelson

I value free play this way:



I can't value free play on "expected return" or anything like it because I expect zero when I put money in a video poker machine.

The paytable does not represented expected return. The paytable represents what different hands pay if you hit them. Of course the APs will disagree with me.

---

Alan this isn't an AP versus non-AP situation.

In my example above, if I gave someone $25 as a gift to play a hand of video poker, and they hit a $20k Royal, would you say I gave them $20k or $25?

If the answer is $25, then you were valuing the freeplay at $25, not $20,000 (the actual result). See what I mean?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Dan Druff

Alan this isn't an AP versus non-AP situation.

In my example above, if I gave someone $25 as a gift to play a hand of video poker, and they hit a $20k Royal, would you say I gave them $20k or $25?

If the answer is $25, then you were valuing the freeplay at $25, not $20,000 (the actual result). See what I mean?

---

There's a difference Dan. In your example you gave someone $25 of actual cash and cash is cash.

What we are talking about here is how do you value "free play." This is why I value free play only as a substitute for what I would have spent of my own money.

And to answer your question specifically: If I gave you a free play certificate for $25 and you hit a $20,000 all I could say is that I gave you a $25 free play certificate. If I gave you $25 cash and you hit a $20,000 royal I would hit you over the head and beat you to a bloody pulp until you gave me half.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Alan Mendelson

I value free play this way:

I can't value free play on "expected return" or anything like it because I expect zero when I put money in a video poker machine.

The paytable does not represented expected return. The paytable represents what different hands pay if you hit them. Of course the APs will disagree with me.

---

If you really expected zero then you probably wouldn't play VP at all. What is different about freeplay and regular play where you'd expect zero from freeplay and something else from regular play? If you were honest with yourself you would admit that you expect "something" out of freeplay. It appears you are lying to yourself so you can disagree with APs.

Now this is an interesting topic of discussion.

It seems to me what is being discussed here is the "theoretical value" of free play versus "actual value".

I'm sure when the casino is calculating freeplay they are using the theoretical value. That's probably how they over-inflate the value of what they are offering players when tax time rolls around. Not too unlike the comps they offer.

We should also define "actual value". To most if not all, that would refer to the actual amount of money the $100 free play generated. But what about the entertainment value of that $100 in freeplay? To "enjoy" the excitement of 20 hands of $1 VP you would need $100 in real cash or freeplay. If you were to spend $100 on 10 movies at $10 a piece, no one would question the "value" you got for the money. Since we're all hardened gamblers here, we discount the "enjoyment" factor of those 20 hands and just want to know what the final result is.

Here in Ontario we have a Pick 6 lottery (Lotto 6/49). They recently made some changes to the payouts. Now, 2 out of 6 numbers yields a freeplay. The tickets cost $3 each. The other day when I went to buy my 3 regular sets of numbers, I won a freeplay from the previous draw. Instead of paying $9 for my 3 tickets, I asked if I could pay $6 and use my freeplay for the last ticket. Nope. I was given a "quick-pick" and had to pay the full $9. $3 in actual cash is worth more to the Lottery Corporation than a $3 quick-pick.

We might try to rationalize our casino visits by saying $100 freeplay is worth $99 on a VP machine, but in reality it isn't. Try getting the casino to give you $99 in cash instead.

Very interesting post, a2. That was good.

I don't assign the theoretical value because it's not modal, in a sense. Look at it this way -- you get a free ticket to play MegaBucks. The ticket has a theoretical value. But that's not helpful because the reality is that you win zero or become rich. And you ain't becoming rich. So it's worth zero. You can assign a theoretical if you want, but from a pragmatic gambling perspective, that's a worthless calculation.

The less vp you play, the less helpful the theoretical is. If I'm playing 40-80 hours a year, it's more useful to plug in real after-the-play figures.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by arcimede$

If you really expected zero then you probably wouldn't play VP at all. What is different about freeplay and regular play where you'd expect zero from freeplay and something else from regular play? If you were honest with yourself you would admit that you expect "something" out of freeplay. It appears you are lying to yourself so you can disagree with APs.

---

I have said many times that I expect nothing once my money is in the machine. To me it's money lost. It is money out of my control. It is money in the hands of the RNG. I "play" it as best I can but I live with no illusions that the RNG will cooperate with the cards I hold and draw or that the RNG respects proper strategy.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Alan Mendelson

I have said many times that I expect nothing once my money is in the machine. To me it's money lost. It is money out of my control. It is money in the hands of the RNG. I "play" it as best I can but I live with no illusions that the RNG will cooperate with the cards I hold and draw or that the RNG respects proper strategy.

---

You are lying to yourself, Alan. If you really expected "nothing" from VP play then you wouldn't play. What you really mean is you realize that any session could be a bust. So, you can't expect to win. That is not the same as expecting you will always lose. In fact, you pointed this out when you mentioned the RNG. In other words, you don't expect to win or lose, you expect that sometimes you will win and other times you will lose. It all comes down to luck in any particular session.

Clearly, that is not the same as expecting you will always lose.

Finally, the results of one's freeplay are only the credits earned as the freeplay itself is played through. For example, $100 of freeplay only gets you 20 hands. After those 20 hands you are playing on your own money. With this definition in mind it becomes obvious that anyone will rarely lose their freeplay entirely. Hence, one should "expect" to win almost always. They might not win the value of the freeplay, or they might win more. But, they will rarely lose.

No Arc. I expect to lose. If I win I got lucky.

There is a "famous author" who also talks about expectations about winning and often he writes about losing thousands because of his expectations. But if he -- and the others -- went into casinos expecting to lose (which is pretty much the reality of casino play) he and everyone else would lose much less.

If is this false expectation of winning that causes people to lose too much. I have seen it so many times: a player gets up from a machine saying "It had a payback of 99.54% but I just lost a thousand dollars." And I've seen this, too: a player gets up from a machine saying "it had a positive payback of 100.17% but why did I lose everything?"

By all means, Arc, if you have an expectation of winning, continue to do so. But don't tell me to expect to win. These are not government bonds that your money in the slot are buying.

Alan, you're missing the ridiculous point arci is trying so hard to bestow upon you. He cannot fathom anyone he either knows, knows of, or has heard about, being able to live with themselves after not getting anything back from whatever was put into any machine. Losing hurts him so much because it is not something he can afford, so you or anyone else losing or expecting they will lose, must be mocked. And that's because he always tries to force everone else to believe in and see things as he does, and if they don't then you get to watch him attempt to mitigate the irritability by tossing insults, lying, and name-calling. It's all he has that might make him feel just a little bit better after all is said and done.

Learn to speak arci. He always reaches out....esp. in these trying days :)

Rob I think the danger of "expecting" to win whether it be the pay table, or the odds, is what leads people to keep betting beyond what would be their loss limit. Of course, APs don't believe in loss limits or win goals... hence they run the risk of losing more than what "non-APs" might lose.

When you think about it, the belief in "expected return" comes awfully close to the belief that "I am due to win" and we know that the "I am due to win" belief is false. So shouldn't the "expected return" belief ripe with danger?

If you really believe in a random game how can anything be "expected." It can be "hoped for," but not "expected." Unless of course the mathematical definition of "expected" differs from common language... and common sense.

Alan, you are still lying to yourself. In this case you are trying to trick yourself. By claiming that you expect to lose you hope to reduce the likelihood that you will have a big loss. However, like all of us you have had winning and losing sessions. Hence, you know as an absolute fact that you won't always lose. Quit with the silly nonsense. You're only fooling yourself.

I love the new comment by speedo, complete and total projection.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by arcimede$

Alan, you are still lying to yourself. In this case you are trying to trick yourself. By claiming that you expect to lose you hope to reduce the likelihood that you will have a big loss. However, like all of us you have had winning and losing sessions. Hence, you know as an absolute fact that you won't always lose. Quit with the silly nonsense. You're only fooling yourself.

I love the new comment by speedo, complete and total projection.

---

Come on Arc, now you're not making any sense. How can you say I am "lying to myself"? How can you say "you know as an absolute fact that you won't always lose"? That's ridiculous. There is NOTHING that says I will win. I could lose each and every time.

And frankly, if you don't have win goals you could lose every single time because there is no reason for you to stop and pocket a win and walk out. There is also nothing that says I will ever have a winning hand.

Now, fortunately for me, and for you, we play games that are appropriate for our bankrolls so we have a chance at hitting winners. But I've been at video poker machines where I have lost 20 hands in a row -- and fortunately I had the bankroll to play twenty more hands after that. But if I didn't -- that would have been a total loser of a session, wouldn't it?

The point is you can't make statements like "you know as an absolute fact that you won't always lose." Statements like that are dangerous -- very dangerous. Maybe there should be a "black box warning" on all casino games that says "Warning: you could lose it all playing this game"?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Alan Mendelson

Come on Arc, now you're not making any sense. How can you say I am "lying to myself"? How can you say "you know as an absolute fact that you won't always lose"? That's ridiculous. There is NOTHING that says I will win. I could lose each and every time.

---

But you haven't, have you? Do you want to discuss reality or some one in a billion chance?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Alan Mendelson

And frankly, if you don't have win goals you could lose every single time because there is no reason for you to stop and pocket a win and walk out. There is also nothing that says I will ever have a winning hand.

---

Nonsense, no one plays an infinite session. Ever heard of sleep? Quit with the BS.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Alan Mendelson

Now, fortunately for me, and for you, we play games that are appropriate for our bankrolls so we have a chance at hitting winners. But I've been at video poker machines where I have lost 20 hands in a row -- and fortunately I had the bankroll to play twenty more hands after that. But if I didn't -- that would have been a total loser of a session, wouldn't it?

---

Your claim is you never win. You are correct in that you will lose sometimes, but I'm talking about your claim that you WILL lose.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Alan Mendelson

The point is you can't make statements like "you know as an absolute fact that you won't always lose." Statements like that are dangerous -- very dangerous. Maybe there should be a "black box warning" on all casino games that says "Warning: you could lose it all playing this game"?

---

Yes, I can make statements like that because they are true. No one loses all the time. All it takes is getting two pair one time playing JOB to refute the claim of never winning.

This is the point of discussion:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by arcimede$

Your claim is you never win. You are correct in that you will lose sometimes, but I'm talking about your claim that you WILL lose.

---

But what I said, and I stand by it is is this:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Alan Mendelson

I have said many times that I expect nothing once my money is in the machine. To me it's money lost. It is money out of my control. It is money in the hands of the RNG. I "play" it as best I can but I live with no illusions that the RNG will cooperate with the cards I hold and draw or that the RNG respects proper strategy.

---

Sure I might win. But I do not expect any wins.

Once again you are lying to yourself. If you "expected" to lose every time you play, why would you ever play? It would make no sense. You are ignoring that you know from previous experience you will win sometimes, maybe today, maybe not. But there is a chance you will win. Hence, you are not expecting to lose. You are just preparing yourself mentally for that higher probability situation. Why not just say you have a chance of winning but a better chance of losing and quit lying to yourself.

Alan, I think you and arcimede$ have a different interpretation of "expected"

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by a2a3dseddie

Alan, I think you and arcimede$ have a different interpretation of "expected"

---

Absolutely. And this different interpretation is similar to the interpretation of the phrase "no house advantage" when referring to the odds bets on come and passline bets in craps.

Mathematically there is "no house advantage" meaning the odds bet is paid off at true odds. But in simple English the house has the advantage on the bet and is more likely to win it. I learned about this distinction "the hard way" (so to speak) on another news group years ago.

I have to admit mathematicians have their own language which is different and common words have two meanings. But again this is what gets people into trouble -- when you use the "mathematician's definition" vs. the "common language definition." I use this example to show it:

I am at a $25 craps table and a new player walks up with a single $100 and asks the dealer "how do I play?" The dealer says "put $25 (the minimum bet) on the passline." The new player does that. And the shooter throws the dice and the come-out roll shows a point of 4.

Now the dealer says "bet the odds for $75. It's the best bet on the table. There is no house advantage," the dealer says. And the new player puts his remaining three chips behind the passline bet as odds.

The shooter now goes on a great run throwing 5s, 6s, 8s, 9s and 10s and repeating the numbers -- some of them are repeated several times. Meanwhile the new player stands there, watching everyone else getting paid. And after about 15 minutes the shooter sevens-out without throwing a winner 4. The dealer sweeps away the passline bet and the odds. The player's $100 is gone.

As the new player walks away from the table he says to the dealer "I thought you said that was the best bet on the table? I thought you said it had no house advantage?"

That was a critical lesson. A bet that has no house advantage also means no player advantage, but in the game of craps the house is still more likely to win it.

I once lost 20 hands of blackjack in a row without even pushing a hand. I switched tables (I know it doesn't make a difference) twice during that bad run of cards.

I think I hold the blackjack string of losses record. At the old Sahara when they had $1 blackjack, I lost 25 hands in a row. Even when I had 20 the dealer had 21. Even the pit boss came over to say he was sorry. I hate the game with a passion.